Responsive interpretation is the idea that, when interpreting the Constitution, judges should seek reference to the meaning of the document in light of society's current ethos or idea of morality. The idea has its background in McCulloch v. Maryland, a landmark early Supreme Court case where Justice Marshall stated, "let us remember that it is a Constitution that we are expounding," arguing that the Constitution must be ensured to stand the test of time.[1]

Justice Brennan strongly advocated responsive interpretation of the Constitution to solve problems such as racism inherent in society, and remedy other social defects. As such, he is the paradigm "activist judge," in that he sought to expand the meaning of the Constitution to include society's current moral values, not just its original meaning.[3]